Taru Haapala

Examples of Analysing Debates as Politics

This chapter presents eight concrete but different examples of research into the presence of politics or the political in texts and debates. They illustrate that politics can be examined in the various forms it takes and using a variety of approaches. First, politics is related to different actors, strategies, issues and media, all of which can be researched. Second, the researcher can develop different research questions and interests, and choose different material types. And third, the interpretative tools and strategies used will differ from study to study, and from researcher to researcher. The examples highlight how the interpretative analytical tools can be used with regard to different cases and forms of the political and different types of material, along with the scholar’s own political literacy.

Reading Debates Politically

This chapter focuses on the concept of debate, taking the concept of ‘political literacy’ as point of departure. The concept of political literacy means that it is crucial to be willing and competent to judge actions, situations, practices and institutions in terms of political struggle. What kinds of aims can we identify in various utterances, arguments or topoi, and how may we assess their consequences? Based on this idea of political literacy, our leading thesis in this chapter is that parliamentary debate, as it was formed and is practised in the British parliament at Westminster, forms an approximation to the ideal type of debate. The ideal type allows the classification of the structure and ultimately the analysis of debates by different criteria, such as topics, parliamentary speech acts or participants.

Research Practices and Operations in Studying Debates and Documents

The chapter presents research practices and operations (or methods and techniques) that are useful in studying debates and documents as part, and as arenas and reflections, of political activity, political processes, strategies and actions. It contains first general considerations that are valid and helpful for most interpretative and textual analyses, with additional emphasis set on how to analyse political activity linked to texts: the research interest and research question target the moves, strategies, interests and actors involved in the political processes in question, rather than simply the contents of the text, and this in return crucially determines material selection, research questions, and setting and course of the analysis. The second part presents the core steps of this kind of analysis, using an exemplar case.

Understanding Debate as Politics

The book’s core idea is to present and explain how different actual and virtual debates can be understood and analysed as political actions. We want to provide tools and ways for grasping the complex phenomenon of politics by concentrating on debate, including debates carried out in, or reflected by, documents. The approach proposed allows for a nuanced and detailed understanding of politics, as it does justice to the aims of political actors, taking into account their actions, interests, moves and strategies, and situating them in relation to the different contexts in which their contributions make a difference. The first chapter presents the theoretical and methodological background by answering two crucial questions: Why study debate as politics? What exactly do we mean by ‘politics’?

Debating federal Europe in the British Parliament, c. 1940–49

Abstract Federalism, or the fear of it, worked as a catalyst in the British pre-referendum debate on Brexit in June 2016. In this paper, we focus on the pre-European integration context and ask what kind of an alternative federalism was seen to afford in British politics during and after the Second World War. We limit our discussion to parliamentary debates, which have only rarely been used as primary sources for studying European integration history. The British Parliament was one of the key political arenas for debates on foreign policy, not just in terms of informing the party lines but also guiding the public discussion. In the early part of the 1940s, the British federalist movement was able to generate political debate on the issue and gain the attention of many leading politicians. We argue that the approach to the use of the concept was politically charged but remained open to various context-based interpretations, which did not eventually lead to any concrete proposals. During the latter part of the 1940s, the majority of British MPs were open to different ways of creating unity in Europe. The emphasis on national sovereignty, however, continued. As a result ‘federalism’, attached to structures for unity, gave way to more pragmatic political solutions.

The Politics of Debate in the Union Societies

The chapter discusses the disputes over procedure in the private meetings of the Union Societies and how they can be interpreted politically. Haapala points out that some of the rules were adopted from the House of Commons, although the Unions did not follow the parliamentary model in all respects. As well as noting that the politics of debate in the Unions was largely conducted through rule interpretation and challenging the decisions of the president, the chapter also draws attention to the role of the standing committees, the vast powers of Union presidents and the rhetorical strategies the members used in the debates. The chapter ends with a typology of politicisation of the rules in the Union Societies.

The Politics of Agenda in the Union Debates

The chapter consists of a discussion of the politicisation of the agenda in the Oxford and Cambridge Unions’ public debates roughly between the reform acts in 1832 and 1867. As well as relating the setting of political agenda to the classical rhetorical tradition of inventio, Haapala contrasts the Union practices to the parliamentary setting of debating on both sides of an issue. The chapter also proposes that the Union public debates showed the use of certain rhetorical commonplaces, or topoi, which are named as principle, expediency, character and vote of confidence. Finally, Haapala offers a typology of political agenda setting in the Unions.

Conclusion: Transfer of the Rhetoric of Procedure to British Debating Societies

In the concluding chapter, Haapala demonstrates why nineteenth-century British rhetoric should be appreciated more than previous studies suggest. While highlighting the political relevance of the British debating societies, the chapter illuminates the crucial role of the transfer of the rhetoric of procedure from the House of Commons to the Union Societies. Instead of focusing on the role of speech-making in British political culture, it puts forward an interpretation of the Unions as forerunners in the adoption of parliamentary procedure.

The Union Societies’ Role in the Formation of a Parliamentary Culture of Debate

Here the Oxford and Cambridge Unions are placed in the British tradition of debating societies. Haapala shows that the Unions were forerunners in the adoption of parliamentary debate and that they became models for other similar associations, thus taking a prominent role in the formation of a parliamentary culture of debate in Britain. The foundation of the Union Societies is discussed with comparisons to other contemporary and previously established debating societies, paying particular attention to membership requirements and rhetorical training. Finally, some first-hand accounts of the benefits of Union training for political careers will be provided.

Introduction: The Rhetoric of Parliamentary Debate

Haapala introduces a rhetorical approach to studying parliamentary debate. Focusing on the debating practices of the Oxford and Cambridge Unions, the chapter suggests that an extraordinary relationship was formed between debate and parliamentary procedure in the Unions and the mid nineteenth-century House of Commons. As well as drawing attention to the relevance of procedure and rules of debate in the history of the British Parliament, Haapala discusses approaches previously used to make sense of parliamentary discourse and debate. The chapter also illustrates the adoption of parliamentary procedure in the Unions and highlights them as an important historical source for understanding political activity in British parliamentary culture.